https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/7105

Republic v Ekidor (Criminal Case E010 of 2025) [2026] KEHC 7105 (KLR) (7 May 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEHC 7105 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the High Court at Nanyuki Criminal Case E010 of 2025 JN Kamau, J May 7, 2026 Between Republic Prosecutor and Peter Ekidor Accused Ruling 1.The court considered the submissions of the Accused person and those of the counsel for the State, the Affidavit Opposing Bail of No 241861 IP Gladys Karaya that was sworn on 3rd September 2025 and filed on 5th September 2025, the Replying Affidavit by the Accused person dated 25th September 2025 and filed on 25th March 2026 and the Pre-Bail Report of Muchuku Morris, Probation Officer Laikipia County that was dated 10th November 2025. 2.According to the said Pre- Bail Report, the Accused person appeared not to understand the seriousness of the Charge and legal consequences if he was convicted. He denied having committed the offence and believed he was facing charges of assault causing actual bodily harm. He was living in a rented house in Naro moru and engaged in casual labour. His family asked this court to grant him lenient bond terms citing their humble background. 3.The victim’s family was said to be still bitter and traumatised after the incident following the death of their child who was their bread winner. The community was also said to have a negative attitude towards the Accused person. It considered him a potential threat to the safety and its wellbeing as he was involved in incidences of local thefts and often engaged in frequent conflicts with his parents and displayed lack of respect to his parents and other members of the community. The community was also concerned that he had no Identity Card despite being twenty six (26) years of age. It proposed that he be released at a later date once the matter stabilised. 4.The Respondent averred that after the attack on the deceased, the Accused person attempted to run away and that it took intervention of the public who chased him and apprehended him. It added that he attacked one of the persons who apprehended him. It pointed out that he had no fixed place of abode. 5.Notably, living in a rented house or not having an identification document on oneself were in themselves not proof that a person was a flight risk. Indeed, a person could have obtained an identification document but was not in possession of the same at any given time. Living in a rented house and lack of identification, therefore, had to be considered alongside other factors, such as the attitude of the community to an accused person and character of the accused person. 6.The court noted that if the Accused person was to be released on bond, he would integrate with the same community that expressed concerns about his erratic behaviors. Hostility was a factor that would persuade a court not to grant bail/bond. 7.His lack of an identification document, however, caused this court uneasiness of how he could be traced if he moved out of this court’s jurisdiction and failed to attend court for one reason or the other and not necessarily absconding. It did appear to this court that he had not obtained an identification documentation. He had attained the age of majority and had not found it necessary to obtain a National Identity Card. For this reason, it did appear that he was a possible flight risk. 8.It was the considered view of this court that the risk of the Accused person being a flight risk and the risk he posed to the community were solid factors for this court to consider declining the application for bail/bond at this time. Having said so, the Investigating Officer was not very averse to him being granted bail only requesting that the court grant bond on stringent terms which the Probation Office suggested. Disposition 9.Accordingly, the upshot of this court’s decision was that the Accused person’s application for bail/bond be and is hereby allowed. The Accused person be and is hereby released on a person bond of Kshs 300,000/= and a surety of a similar amount. 10.The Accused person be and is hereby directed not to leave his area of residence without leave of the court and to report to the nearest police at least once every week until further orders of the court. 11.The Accused person be and is hereby further directed to apply for a National Identity Card forthwith and to inform the court of the position during the next time comes up in court. 12.It is so ordered. DATED AND DELIVERED AT NANYUKI THIS 7TH DAY OF MAY 2026J. KAMAUJUDGE